feat(playground): add important features to playground @W-15545976 #4161
Conversation
Previously, changing just a CSS file did nothing. Changing an HTML/JS file after a CSS file caused the page to not render, and require a refresh. Now, changing a CSS file *still* does nothing, But changing another file after works as expected and shows the CSS changes.
| @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ export default (args) => { | |||
| open: false, | |||
| port: 3000, | |||
| }), | |||
| args.watch && livereload(), | |||
| args.watch && livereload('dist'), | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Previously, changing just a CSS file did nothing. Changing an HTML/JS file after a CSS file caused the page to fail to render, and required a page refresh to fix. Now, changing a CSS file still does nothing, but changing another file after works as expected and shows the CSS changes.
| this.dataCallback('...'); // "loading" state | ||
| setTimeout(this.dataCallback, 500, config.first * config.second); | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Customers can't actually create custom wire adapters on the platform, so this may be misleading.
If we want to demonstrate decorators, do we need @wire? Or can @api/@track suffice?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I included it for completeness, but I have no strong feelings.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I feel that the playground should be as close to a "hello world" as possible. So I would shy away from the extra component as well as the @wire.
Demonstrating composition between one parent and one child is enough for a hello world IMO. We can also add an @api/@track as necessary.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've removed @wire and @track, but showcasing LWC without using @api still feels like a gap, so I've included one @api.
Details
The playground should showcase the important basic features of LWC, so it's weird that it doesn't use any decorators or CSS files. This PR adds decorators and CSS files to the playground.
Does this pull request introduce a breaking change?
Does this pull request introduce an observable change?
GUS work item
W-15545976